From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3e1162e60811202133r1ff531c0r6875885b28942cc6@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:33:08 -0800 From: "David Leimbach" To: fernanbolando@mailc.net, "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: <1d5d51400811202011o34f305acte3704e653f916cfa@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_62382_30009308.1227245589006" References: <881467ce0811200915odb0a042xb1c3aa2f292c2677@mail.gmail.com> <49259D0E.9050700@proweb.co.uk> <3e1162e60811201609x36cc0cf8i355f518eb9548643@mail.gmail.com> <1d5d51400811202011o34f305acte3704e653f916cfa@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] What about Haskell? [was: How can I use alef?] Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4defee7e-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 ------=_Part_62382_30009308.1227245589006 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Fernan Bolando wrote: > On 11/21/08, David Leimbach wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Iruata Souza > wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:23 PM, matt wrote: > >> > > >> >>> > >> >>> Without starting a flame war, I'd like to know if some of you think > it > >> >>> could > >> >>> be useful on a Plan 9 grid/environment. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> > > >> > I've often though quite a few languages could be shrunken down fit > with > >> > Plan9's diretory/files system. Python, for instance, would need much > >> > less > >> > code for networking etc. > >> > > >> > So a language that specialsed in I/O primitives would be a good > choice. > >> That > >> > doesn't sound like Haskell to me. I/O is about changing state. That > >> > said, > >> > there must be a way to make it fit :) > >> > > >> > Of the few I have used, I think python is the best hybrid that fits. > >> > > >> > >> once in a while I play with fgb's port of tinyscheme and it seems to > >> fit for the pretty simple stuff I do. just for fun, I started adding > >> some Plan 9 native calls to tinyscheme and it worked nicely. > >> > >> iru > >> > > > > I've been doing a lot with both Haskell and Erlang these days... > > > > I'm also impressed by the rich Haskell library and that the binaries, > even > > on linux, tend to only depend on libc once built for "deployment". Well > > that's true with GHC anyway, but porting GHC to Plan 9 might take a > serious > > step back in time to bootstrap the C sources all the way back up to the > > current version. > > > > Dave > > > > what about nhc98? > > -- > http://www.fernski.com > Honestly I hadn't thought about that one too much, but I think that that'd be fun to try. ------=_Part_62382_30009308.1227245589006 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Fernan Bolando <fernanbolando@mailc.net> wrote:
On 11/21/08, David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Iruata Souza <iru.muzgo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:23 PM, matt <mattmobile@proweb.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> Without starting a flame war, I'd like to know if some of you think it
>> >>> could
>> >>> be useful on a Plan 9 grid/environment.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >
>> > I've often though quite a few languages could be shrunken down fit with
>> > Plan9's diretory/files system. Python, for instance, would need much
>> > less
>> > code for networking etc.
>> >
>> > So a language that specialsed in I/O primitives would be a good choice.
>> That
>> > doesn't sound like Haskell to me. I/O is about changing state. That
>> > said,
>> > there must be a way to make it fit :)
>> >
>> > Of the few I have used, I think python is the best hybrid that fits.
>> >
>>
>> once in a while I play with fgb's port of tinyscheme and it seems to
>> fit for the pretty simple stuff I do. just for fun, I started adding
>> some Plan 9 native calls to tinyscheme and it worked nicely.
>>
>> iru
>>
>
> I've been doing a lot with both Haskell and Erlang these days...
>
> I'm also impressed by the rich Haskell library and that the binaries, even
> on linux, tend to only depend on libc once built for "deployment".  Well
> that's true with GHC anyway, but porting GHC to Plan 9 might take a serious
> step back in time to bootstrap the C sources all the way back up to the
> current version.
>
> Dave
>

what about nhc98?

--
http://www.fernski.com

Honestly I hadn't thought about that one too much, but I think that that'd be fun to try. 

------=_Part_62382_30009308.1227245589006--